Using the law to resolve electoral disputes – OccupyGhana

General news for Thursday, December 24, 2020

Source: FM class

2020-12-24

Civil society group OccupyGhana said any disputes arising from the recently held general elections must be resolved according to the law.

In a statement, OccupyGhana said it has closely observed the events and circumstances leading up to, during and following the general elections which were held in Ghana on December 7, 2020, adding: “We are convinced that the elections are supposed to indicate who the people (in whom lies the ultimate sovereignty) have mandated to lead them for the next four years. Any other result is unacceptable ”.

OG said: “We must first express our satisfaction with the work of the Election Commission in registering voters and voting itself. With the threat of COVID-19 and all the bumps and criticisms, we admit that the EC has done a commendable job for which it deserves our congratulations ”.

The EC, she noted, “however began to run into problems when it set itself a rather optimistic 24 hour deadline to declare the presidential results. To the extent that we recognize that the EC had measures and structures in place to ensure it met this deadline, failure to moderate this with factors beyond its control, such as weather conditions, meant that they could not meet this deadline. We appreciate the fact that the EC was nevertheless able to report the results within 48 hours ”.

“However, we took note of errors in the numbers in the published results. We recall that the issue of errors was raised during the hearing of the petition for the presidential election in 2013, where we encountered terms such as “calculation errors” and “transposition errors”. From this decision, we learned that it is possible that such errors will occur. When they do, they will invalidate an election in the relevant polling station, constituency or region, or even nationally, if their effect is significant enough to give a victory to someone other than the actual winner. Thus, since some of these errors are fundamental, are regrettable, and should not have happened, it is imperative that all political parties and candidates critically examine the underlying documentation (which they were all supposed to receive in polling stations) and mount challenges where these errors affect the will of those revealed during the vote in the polling station, constituency or region concerned, or at the national level.

“We have, therefore, noted that each of the two main parties expressed different levels of dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the presidential and parliamentary elections and the results. This is to be expected, and that is why, although Article 46 of the Constitution gives the EC independence in its work, which was explained by the Supreme Court as meaning that “… in the conduct of their affairs, the Election Commission is fully independent in this regard and is not subject to the control, direction, management, manipulation and / or interference of anyone or any institution. or, “ the same Court ruled that the ‘independent status of [EC] does not exempt it from any action to declare that it has[…]acted in a manner which, having regard to its unreasonable, irrational or unfair nature, cannot be granted the sanction of legality ”. A BOI who refuses to hear or consider any reasonable challenge based on credible evidence is a BOI who acts unreasonably, irrational and unfair.

“With particular reference to Article 295 (8) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has declared that even ‘when a person or an authority [such as the EC] is not, by the provisions of this Constitution of 1992 or of any other law, subject to the direction or control of any person or authority in the exercise of its functions or functions, the court does not is not precluded from examining the accuracy or otherwise of the performance of such duties or functions. ‘And to emphasize, the Supreme Court repeated that’ even if the power or the function is entrusted exclusively to an authority [such as the EC] … and in the exercise of this function, the authority is not subject to any direction or control by anyone, Article 295 (8) of the 1992 Constitution still empowers Ghanaian courts to inquire into whether this authority exercises this function in accordance with the Constitution. ‘

“Thus, if the BOI has misbehaved itself or has deliberately or negligently made a false statement, the BOI is not immune from legal challenges. We are of the opinion that this challenge can be mounted administratively, by the political party or the candidate showing to the EC, by means of his poll or other credible evidence, that what has been declared is false and / or does not reflect the will of people. We believe that when such evidence is presented to the EC, the EC is required by law to examine it and possibly overturn a false statement. However, if the EC is not prepared to listen, or wrongly rejects the administrative challenge, or cannot effect a change because the results have already been published in the Gazette, then the Constitution provides the ultimate avenues to challenge these results either before the “High Court (for a parliamentary election) or the Supreme Court (for the presidential election.)

“We also fully appreciate the right of all citizens to freely demonstrate and express their views. It is certainly an option available to any party or candidate who is dissatisfied with the results and believes that something untoward has happened. If this, coupled with the presentation of credible evidence to the EC, does not lead the EC to change what it said, then the Constitution does not leave the injured party or the candidate empty-handed. This is why it provides the legal remedies mentioned above, and for which express procedural rules have been adopted over the years to facilitate a speedy hearing and expedited resolution of electoral disputes.

“We urge them to political parties and candidates.

“We conclude by fully endorsing the appeal of the Peace Council in its declaration of December 19, 2020 for (i) media sensitivity in these times, (ii) the police to enforce the laws, (iii) the parties to enforce the laws. peace documents they signed and prevent followers of acts of vandalism, etc.